On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 17:45:25 +0100 Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 08.01.2014 17:24, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > > Il 08/01/2014 17:09, Igor Mammedov ha scritto: > >> Adds optional interfaces that objects could implement if > >> they need to: > >> 1. perform an additional initialization after object properties are set > >> 2. be placed not in '/objects' container > >> > >> Series depends on 2 PULL requests in flight from Andreas & Luiz > >> with fixes for QOM interfaces and object-add monitor/QMP command. > >> Git tree for testing: > >> https://github.com/imammedo/qemu/commits/extend-object-add > >> > >> Igor Mammedov (5): > >> object_add: consolidate error handling > >> add optional 2nd stage initialization to > >> -object/object-add/object_add commands > >> virtio_rng: use object_realize interface instead of calling backend > >> API > >> vl.c: -object: handle duplicate 'id' properly > >> -object/object-add: use custom default object location if provided > >> > >> backends/rng.c | 17 ++++++- > >> hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c | 15 ++++--- > >> include/qom/object_interfaces.h | 96 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> include/sysemu/rng.h | 11 ----- > >> qmp.c | 30 +++++++++--- > >> qom/Makefile.objs | 1 + > >> qom/object_interfaces.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> vl.c | 21 ++++++++- > >> 8 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100644 include/qom/object_interfaces.h > >> create mode 100644 qom/object_interfaces.c > >> > > > > Thanks Igor! I like very much patches 1-4 (though I'm thinking that we > > need some style conventions for interfaces). I think patch 5 adds more > > complexity than we need, but I'm open to discussion. > > Hm, I have doubts about the use of "realize" here. So far that is only > implemented for devices, patches for bus still pending my review, and > for those we don't want that to be handled by -object or object-add but > recursive realization as part of machine initialization, allowing > interaction via qom-set before. It that's different for backends, can we > maybe pick a name different from "realize"? Any suggestions? > > Andreas >
